Diligence memo · auto-generated · as of July 3, 2026

Santa Barbara Management Holdings, LLC

Santa Barbara Management Holdings, LLC looks over-valued against its niche peers and is quiet on financing cadence.

SourceRaising on rhythm with a 6.1× step-up on the last round — momentum worth tracking before it's priced in.

Businessfiled

Santa Barbara Management Holdings, LLC operates in Other, based in CHICAGO.

Sector still resolves to a broad 'Other' bucket, so operating comparables below are weaker than for a tightly-classified peer.

No verified homepage on file yet — operating evidence is limited to the public record.

Capital & rounds (filed)filed

Santa Barbara Management Holdings, LLC has raised $10M in disclosed capital across 2 recorded rounds, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Series A (a $4.0M–$15M round).

Largest single filing: $8.8M on 2025-04-21.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2025-04-21.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Santa Barbara Management Holdings, LLC at approximately $32M (range $12M–$57M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Over-valued. Modeled value is 1.63× the median modeled value of Series A Other companies in 2025–2027 (487 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Historic cadence: a new round about every 2 months.

Last raise 14 mo ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.

Slightly overdue versus sector cadence.

The last round stepped up 6.1× from the prior — scaling.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 78% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 63% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Sea Court GP, LLC, Kastle Biopartners II LP, Econic Investment LLC, DCFC Holdings, LLC, HeadVantage Corp.

Peoplefiled

3 named people on file across officers, directors and signatories.

Risks & flagsmixed

Modeled above niche peers — valuation risk on entry.

Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.

No clearly named CEO/founder/principal in the surfaced records — key-person evidence is thin.